Apple CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for Equality

[Gutwrench]

I don't know why I feel I want to post this but will just do so.

I have several openly gay professional collegues who I consider friends. I don't think they give a crap that I'm straight so why should I give a crap about their orientation? I was raised Catholic Lite, Lutheran, and I'm not active in any church. Actually I tend to practice aggressive non-involvement when it comes to religious beliefs, but that's my choice. When I was more active I struggled with understanding the dogma of intolerance. (Not to steal a line from an old song)...I had enough trouble running my own life and still do, how could I possibly pass judgement on others?

 

[iBlazed]

Health care workers, unwitting spouses and babies can get the STDs through no fault of their own. People having sex with the wrong people are very much to blame for an STD's spread. Those who approve of their sexual activities share part of the blame. This is why the relatively disease-free lesbians get lumped into the pack of those responsible.

So how is it that the diseases you claim gay people spread are in no way unique to gay people? If your less than scientific theory were true, wouldn't there be specific diseases that only spread among people who sleep with the "wrong people"? But don't let facts get in the way of blaming baby std's on gay people.

 

[bandrews]

Yep, it is vague because I haven't come to that bridge. I only have so much time in life to prepare for problems that I have yet to personally encounter.



If I ever have to do it, perhaps then you will. I'd rather not borrower trouble.
Among the first things I would express is that my love for my child wouldn't change no matter what. I would still be there: still want to see my child's dreams come true wherever they were honorable. And before you ask, no, I haven't decided if I would attend a child's gay wedding. I very much, at present, doubt that I would. It is not a topic I have thoroughly researched and thought through.



Would it surprise you to find out that people can benefit from such courses even if they never change their orientation? Alcoholics go through AAA without ever ceasing to crave alcohol. A Christian brother of mine who has been dry for years recently lamented, "Some days, I can still taste the alcohol in my mouth". I can only imagine how hard it is for him to continue to abstain. Likewise, I have read of people who, after gender orientation therapy, find they can at least enjoy sex with the opposite gender.


Bullying is a sin and I strongly condemn it. Discrimination is likewise of limited value in our current social context.


I'm glad they are happier, but sad that they are that much more desperately lost as souls.



Source?


Health care workers, unwitting spouses and babies can get the STDs through no fault of their own. People having sex with the wrong people are very much to blame for an STD's spread. Those who approve of their sexual activities share part of the blame. This is why the relatively disease-free lesbians get lumped into the pack of those responsible.


Patients often don't like the discomfort of their treatment regimen.

Read this. http://www.christiantoday.com/article/former.ex.gay.leaders.publish.open.letter.saying.conversion.therapy.is.damaging/39256.htm

And this
http://m.livescience.com/38987-gay-conversion-therapy-facts.html

And this
http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/the-lies-and-dangers-of-reparative-therapy

If you want to know, it's that conversion therapy is not only completely useless but it is incredibly damaging.
You may take a look at those links and even if you read every one you will still dismiss them. You could read thousands of scientific papers and hear countless experts talking about new developments and understandings yet you will still continue to live out every aspect of your life in accordance to an ancient manuscript.

I have wasted far too much time trying to break down your ignorance but I see now I am fighting a losing battle. I wish you no ill but hope that one day something happens in your life that opens your eyes to how flawed your faith is.

 

[brianvictor7]

So how is it that the diseases you claim gay people spread are in no way unique to gay people? If your less than scientific theory were true, wouldn't there be specific diseases that only spread among people who sleep with the "wrong people"? But don't let facts get in the way of blaming baby std's on gay people.

iBlazed, I've read your paragraph several times and I am still not sure what you are arguing.

 

[rdowns]

Alcoholics go through AAA without ever ceasing to crave alcohol.

I have to draw the line at drinking and driving.

 

[brianvictor7]

Read this. http://www.christiantoday.com/article/former.ex.gay.leaders.publish.open.letter.saying.conversion.therapy.is.damaging/39256.htm

And this
http://m.livescience.com/38987-gay-conversion-therapy-facts.html

And this
http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/the-lies-and-dangers-of-reparative-therapy

If you want to know, it's that conversion therapy is not only completely useless but it is incredibly damaging.
You may take a look at those links and even if you read every one you will still dismiss them. You could read thousands of scientific papers and hear countless experts talking about new developments and understandings yet you will still continue to live out every aspect of your life in accordance to an ancient manuscript.

I have wasted far too much time trying to break down your ignorance but I see now I am fighting a losing battle. I wish you no ill but hope that one day something happens in your life that opens your eyes to how flawed your faith is.

bandrews, I appreciate that you are doing what you believe to be right. You have been comparatively polite to me in this discussion and I appreciate that. The vitriolic censure I have received in this forum has given me a small taste, I suspect, of what many homosexuals have endured at the hands of hateful heterosexuals.

Since you have been earnestly kind, let me show some vulnerability. I wish I was wrong. I wish it so very deeply. I know many homosexuals. They are each wonderful people in so many ways. I don't want them to be lost. I also don't want to be the unpopular voice. I want to join in the crowd. I quickly checked those articles you linked (one is a broken link on my end) and have been long aware of the problems with past attempts at gender orientation therapy. There is often no cure just as there is no cure for alcoholism or porn addiction or anger mismanagement any number of other sins. There is only control: the refusal to let it master one's self.

Today's medical community does not consider homosexuality a disease because it believes personal worldly happiness is the goal of life. I might buy into that except the problem is the medical community has yet to find a cure for death. If you want you and your loved ones to live forever, you must go to some religion to have hope for it. I get mocked for believing in a 2000 year old document. The thing about truth is that it ages well. The first clue to me that a behavior is wrong is by the fruit it bears. The fruit of sexual immorality, of which homosexuality is a part, is death, disease and depression. Yes, these will be lessened by society's acceptance of the behavior and while the sexually immoral happily march through life, many of them will still drop dead of disease thanks to the lie "I can sleep with whomever I want because it isn't harming anyone." Yes, a few homosexuals advocate strict monogamy. They are few and far between. And before you say it, yes, it can argued that the depression and suicide rate among homosexuals can be attributed to how the heterosexual community has treated them. That is also a clue that we need to treat them with more compassion. But it is not compassionate to tell them homosexual behavior is okay for the reasons I gave above.

In another forum I would be willing to share all my reasons for why I think Christianity is the only true religion on the world market. That isn't my purpose here. My purpose in engaging in this forum was to correct the gross mishandling of Scripture that I saw happening. Usually I refrain from getting into such arguments. They tend to end up like this: one side shouting at the other with neither side listening. I have listened. I know what your arguments are. I've done my homework.

Guys. I think this really is a capstone point. I've tried leave this thread before and was asked to stay by Irishman. I gave him my reply to an article he linked. I'm done here. It is my birthday, I am emotionally drained by this discussion, and I'm absolutely not answering any more posts in this thread. If you want to discuss this further, I will only consider a private message. God bless you all.

 

[flat five]

===

happy birthday ##

 

[Night Spring]

Yes, a few homosexuals advocate strict monogamy. They are few and far between.

I may have said this before, but I think it bears repeating. This view that homosexuals tend to be more promiscuous than heterosexuals is one that is not supported by my life experience. Most homosexual persons I have met were involved in a long term committed relationship. At the same time, I have heterosexual relatives who regularly cheat on their spouse. Indeed, based on the people I have known in *my* life, I might be inclined to conclude that heterosexuals are more inclined to promiscuity than homosexuals.

Of course, it's a fallacy to generalize like that from my life experience alone. But still, that is my life experience, and therefore, I find it hard to accept as fact that homosexuals tend to be more promiscuous than heterosexuals. Therefore, I find it hard to accept that homosexuality is wrong, because as far as I have experienced, committed homosexual relationships have seemed to be just as healthy and wholesome as committed heterosexual relationships.

And this is why it is important that people like Tim Cook come out, so the world can see that homosexuality isn't inherently wrong in and of itself.

The Bible is an admirable book, and I have met and received great caring and generosity from many people of the Christian faith. But I cannot put the teachings of a 2000 year old text above the evidence of my own experience.

Finally, I believe it is not our place to worry whether other people are "lost" or not. We need only concern ourselves with overcoming our own sins. If others ask us for help, of course we should do what we can. But deciding that other people are "lost" or not feels like the kind of judging Jesus admonished against by the "judge not" directive.

I apologize for responding publicly, but this is something I want to say in public, not just to you. I fully understand if you chose not to respond. I hope you have an enjoyable birthday.

 

[Eraserhead]

The fruit of sexual immorality, of which homosexuality is a part, is death, disease and depression. Yes, these will be lessened by society's acceptance of the behavior and while the sexually immoral happily march through life, many of them will still drop dead of disease thanks to the lie "I can sleep with whomever I want because it isn't harming anyone."

In my experience the people who cheat on their partners are almost always unhappy in their relationship.

If you actually love someone everyone else becomes a bit meh sexually.

 

[grahamperrin]

Here's that Muppet again.

A thoughtful phrase, though I do not share the thoughts comprised within the style of writing:

"… very much to blame for an STD's spread. … the relatively disease-free lesbians get lumped into the pack of those responsible."​

Cue some serious stuff peppered with restrained sarcasm.

I suspect that one of my lesbian friends is completely disease-free (lucky her, lucky me). I might message her to confirm that suspicion; she might like to comment on this aspect of the conversation. Until recently she held a senior position in the NHS; not long ago she emigrated and now devotes most of her time, not for profit, caring for abandoned animals in a part of the world where the notional infrastructure for care of that nature was (before her arrival) simply not applicable. In blunt terms: where there were countless deaths, now there is life and love.

She's also Jewish, but I would never have guessed that from her nose. With the thoughtful style of writing quoted above in mind, would it be appropriate to "lump her into the pack of relatively big-nosed Jews"? She's also fastidiously clean. Would it be appropriate to "lump her" in with a group of relatively less clean people? No, and no.

brianvictor7, I'm thankful that a feature of this forum spares me from stumbling across most of what you write. If you imagine that the ultimate effect will be preaching to a convert, I can not imagine that happening. Building upon the comments of some other readers: I believe that your writings here devalue a subset of beliefs, a subset within a set that was already of debatable value before the happy coming out of Tim Cook. That devaluation is unfortunate, because it reinforces some of the negative stereotypes that are increasingly applied to people who hold religious beliefs of an entirely good nature. The past five minutes have made me richer by one dollar but honestly, I was happier when I was that one dollar closer to poverty. Phrases such as "all those poor homosexuals" rarely meet with a warm reception but in the context given here, I believe that it's better to be poor.

----

Being lumped into the pack of supposedly venereal disease STD-spreading gays and their relatively disease-free lezzer pals (some of whom are clean and relatively less clean Jews) is more attractive to me than reading the words of someone who politely preaches a mixture of goodness and the opposite of goodness. To understand why I'm willing to resort to sarcasm but not overt personal insult, it's necessary to first appreciate that (a) careless discussion of the AIDS epidemic; (b) attempts to define homosexuals as immoral; (c) words such as 'pack' and (by implication) 'dirty' – and so on – appreciate that such things can be offensive at a level deeper than the offender is shallow.

 

[\-V-/]

A thoughtful phrase, though I do not share the thoughts comprised within the style of writing:

"… very much to blame for an STD's spread. … the relatively disease-free lesbians get lumped into the pack of those responsible."​

[url=http://i.imgur.com/mkGMwaK.gif]Image[/URL]



Cue some serious stuff peppered with restrained sarcasm.



I suspect that one of my lesbian friends is completely disease-free (lucky her, lucky me). I might message her to confirm that suspicion; she might like to comment on this aspect of the conversation. Until recently she held a senior position in the NHS; not long ago she emigrated and now devotes most of her time, not for profit, caring for abandoned animals in a part of the world where the notional infrastructure for care of that nature was (before her arrival) simply not applicable. In blunt terms: where there were countless deaths, now there is life and love.



She's also Jewish, but I would never have guessed that from her nose. With the thoughtful style of writing quoted above in mind, would it be appropriate to "lump her into the pack of relatively big-nosed Jews"? She's also fastidiously clean. Would it be appropriate to "lump her" in with a group of relatively less clean people? No, and no.



brianvictor7, I'm thankful that a feature of this forum spares me from stumbling across most of what you write. If you imagine that the ultimate effect will be preaching to a convert, I can not imagine that happening. Building upon the comments of some other readers: I believe that your writings here devalue a subset of beliefs, a subset within a set that was already of debatable value before the happy coming out of Tim Cook. That devaluation is unfortunate, because it reinforces some of the negative stereotypes that are increasingly applied to people who hold religious beliefs of an entirely good nature. The past five minutes have made me richer by one dollar but honestly, I was happier when I was that one dollar closer to poverty. Phrases such as "all those poor homosexuals" rarely meet with a warm reception but in the context given here, I believe that it's better to be poor.



----



Being lumped into the pack of supposedly venereal disease STD-spreading gays and their relatively disease-free lezzer pals (some of whom are clean and relatively less clean Jews) is more attractive to me than reading the words of someone who politely preaches a mixture of goodness and the opposite of goodness. To understand why I'm willing to resort to sarcasm but not overt personal insult, it's necessary to first appreciate that (a) careless discussion of the AIDS epidemic; (b) attempts to define homosexuals as immoral; (c) words such as 'pack' and (by implication) 'dirty' – and so on – appreciate that such things can be offensive at a level deeper than the offender is shallow.

And yet he keeps going. I'm glad you can see through it all, but he's not even going to acknowledge you ... and he will keep lathering on the fake coating of nice over a rather vile core. He's easily one of the worst people I've seen in this forum ... or any forum, for that matter ... and yet he's allowed to keep posting. The quality control for posting in this forum has clearly gone to the gutters. I've actually lost an immense amount of respect for MacRumors to allow this kind of hateful garbage being targeted at an entire group of people to carry on ... for thousands of posts, no less. It must be nice to speak in the manner that he does ... protected by a computer screen so that he doesn't straight up get his face smashed in ... because that's what would actually happen if anyone was stupid enough to talk like this in public. It's easy to act this way online. It is nauseating and frustrating beyond measure that anyone can be this delusional and hateful, but thanks to the carelessness of MacRumors, it will probably continue on for another 2,000 posts.

 

[grahamperrin]

Respect, restraint and thanks

… he's not even going to acknowledge you …

I added him to the (very short) list of people ignored by me. I expect that my name is on hist list; if that's the case, I should respect his preference by asking people to quote me only if necessary, and selectively (to not accidentally circumvent the ignore feature); with consideration for all concerned.

Use of the ignore feature is more than just appropriate. With emphasis: the ignore feature can be surprisingly, pleasantly effective.

I'm happy to engage in reasonable, non-confrontational discussion in response to posts that show appropriate respect.

For what it's worth, I assume that moderators are, collectively, showing appropriate restraint.

Thank you …

 

[Renzatic]

And yet he keeps going. I'm glad you can see through it all, but he's not even going to acknowledge you ... and he will keep lathering on the fake coating of nice over a rather vile core. He's easily one of the worst people I've seen in this forum ... or any forum, for that matter ... and yet he's allowed to keep posting. The quality control for posting in this forum has clearly gone to the gutters. I've actually lost an immense amount of respect for MacRumors to allow this kind of hateful garbage being targeted at an entire group of people to carry on ... for thousands of posts, no less.

Not that I'm taking his side, but this is PRSI, the closest thing we have to a no-holds-barred discussathon here on Macrumors. So long as he's civil about it, he can voice any opinion he wants to.

 

[grahamperrin]

Not that I'm taking his side, but this is PRSI, the closest thing we have to a no-holds-barred discussathon here on Macrumors. So long as he's civil about it, he can voice any opinion he wants to.

UK here. Should I recognise 'PRSI' – is it an acronym and can it be expanded in this topic? (Excuse my ignorance.)

+1
and the nature of Cook's coming out is having a more positive effect than he might have dreamt of.

Now more than ever before I'm prepared to challenge prejudice – with absolutely no shame of being gay or whatever – and (just maybe) help the few people who unwittingly show prejudice, or cause offence, to realise that they have done so.

May there be many more like me, stronger than me.

I never met you Tim Cook, and I doubt that I ever will, but thanks. The meaning of "cool" at a keynote is nowhere near as cool as the way you handled this.

 

[Renzatic]

UK here. Should I recognise 'PRSI' – is it an acronym and can it be expanded in this topic? (Excuse my ignorance.)

Name of the forum. PRSI: Politics, Religion, and Social Issues. Pronounced "percy" by all the cool kids.

+1
and the nature of Cook's coming out is having a more positive effect than he might have dreamt of.

Now more than ever before I'm prepared to challenge prejudice – with absolutely no shame of being gay or whatever – and (just maybe) help the few people who unwittingly show prejudice, or cause offence, to realise that they have done so.

May there be many more like me, stronger than me.

Nor should you feel any shame. Though he has the right to voice his opinion, you have the right to voice yours, and throw his opinion right back in his face if you so feel like it.

I gotta admit, I'm not the best person to speak about civility on a forum, because I've had more than a few lapses in judgement, and occasionally make fun of people when they say something I think is really, really dumb.

But I try, damnit! I try!

 

[grahamperrin]

… I try, damnit! I try!

Thanks for all of that. Before posting I try to always bear in mind informal discussion of smart-ass attitudes, meanness and so on; and to treat the opinions there as complementary to the formal FAQ and rules of the forum.

I try, but just occasionally I find myself posting something that I might be not particularly proud of at some point in the future. I hope that it all falls within the boundaries of 'heated debate'. I imagine that there were far more heated exchanges amongst the thousands of posts that were made before I joined (I was a relative latecomer) …

… I don't plan to trawl through that lot

 

[iBlazed]

iBlazed, I've read your paragraph several times and I am still not sure what you are arguing.

Sounds like a you problem.

 

[Meister]

And yet he keeps going. I'm glad you can see through it all, but he's not even going to acknowledge you ... and he will keep lathering on the fake coating of nice over a rather vile core. He's easily one of the worst people I've seen in this forum ... or any forum, for that matter ... and yet he's allowed to keep posting. The quality control for posting in this forum has clearly gone to the gutters. I've actually lost an immense amount of respect for MacRumors to allow this kind of hateful garbage being targeted at an entire group of people to carry on ... for thousands of posts, no less. It must be nice to speak in the manner that he does ... protected by a computer screen so that he doesn't straight up get his face smashed in ... because that's what would actually happen if anyone was stupid enough to talk like this in public. It's easy to act this way online. It is nauseating and frustrating beyond measure that anyone can be this delusional and hateful, but thanks to the carelessness of MacRumors, it will probably continue on for another 2,000 posts.

So you want to censor his opinion? Interesting understanding of freedom you have.

Btw, you need to check your period key

 

[k995]

I am not totally a fan of organised religion myself, but I would not call it moronic. That's just your opinion.

Of course its "just my opinion" dont see a lot of others here .

And I keep find it amazing how people can rationalize believing in ghosts and goblins .

I also think that Cook brought this up because he had a hard time growing up in Alabama and that is unfortunate.

Not just growing up , its still happening and largely fueled by religious zealots .

 

[Meister]

Of course its "just my opinion" dont see a lot of others here .

And I keep find it amazing how people can rationalize believing in ghosts and goblins .


Not just growing up , its still happening and largely fueled by religious zealots .

I don't think christians believe in goblins.

 

[grahamperrin]

Just curious …

So you want to censor his opinion? …

Meister, I enjoy your occasional plain speech and so on.

I wonder whether you can realise (empathise with?) the strength of feeling that can result from deeply offensive words after, on top of, umpteen years of being oppressed.

That's not a play of an 'our community's suffering is/was worse than yours' card, and I'm not trying to imply that you're thoughtless.

I treat the wish, of an offended person, for an offender to **** (or be overtly moderated) as a freedom of speech. He or she should be free to say, in so many words, fermez la fourchette au-dessus; and to rant about a perceived lack of moderation.

Just thoughts – I'm genuinely curious, not attempting to be combative.

(Also it would be nice to not perpetuate separatist thoughts e.g. me not part of your (presumably straight) community, and so on, but I'm not about to ride off on a whale-saving unicorn or anything so for the moment I'll stick as close as I can to plain speech … if that makes sense.)

 

[\-V-/]

So you want to censor his opinion? Interesting understanding of freedom you have.



Btw, you need to check your period key

Censor his opinion? No. I want someone who continues to maliciously attack a group of people to shut the **** up.

 

[Night Spring]

I don't think christians believe in goblins.

I think at its core Christians believe in "love one another." It's just that there are many centuries of ritualistic ceremony and rules and traditions (on which the various sects of Christianity don't reslly agree with each other) associated with it that look like ghosts and goblins to skeptical outsiders. And then of course, there are the differences over what it means to love one another and how to express that love.

But, you know, if people find "ghost, goblins and fairy tales" helpful as guides to living a meaningful life, that's their business. I don't think it's right to ridicule their beliefs by calling them goblins and whatnot. On the other hand, when people insist that their faith must be true for everyone, I can kind of see how that might invite this kind of ridicule. The sad part is, not all religious people are like this -- there are plenty of deeply religious people who understand that their faith is a personal thing between them and their God and not a universal truth to be pushed on to everyone else. I'm sorry that some people seem to have experiences only with the "ghosts and goblins" type of religiosity, and so dismiss all religions as fairy tales.

 

[grahamperrin]

… amazing how people can rationalize believing in ghosts …

I didn't explicitly mention ghosts in my rambling post a while back, but ghosts (for want of a better expression) are somewhere within the picture. I'm curious, contemplative about that aspect of things, but I don't imagine that I'll ever reach a rational conclusion.

No "wooooooo" things and white bedsheets in my own case. All rather mundane and no problem to live with. There was someone in a white top/dress once, blonde curly hair, and it wasn't just me who saw her. Later that evening my flatmate's girlfriend, who had looked through the front window of the flat whilst passing on the top floor of a double-decker, had a right barney with him about seeing the woman in the flat.

Not rational. It's more enjoyable to retain a sense of wonder for some things.

Incidentally, nothing wondrous about the blonde-ness of her hair or the cut of her clothing, just … we (all) wondered about that event … and a few others. No goblins, either.

 

[noodlemanc]

And yet he keeps going. I'm glad you can see through it all, but he's not even going to acknowledge you ... and he will keep lathering on the fake coating of nice over a rather vile core. He's easily one of the worst people I've seen in this forum ... or any forum, for that matter ... and yet he's allowed to keep posting. The quality control for posting in this forum has clearly gone to the gutters. I've actually lost an immense amount of respect for MacRumors to allow this kind of hateful garbage being targeted at an entire group of people to carry on ... for thousands of posts, no less. It must be nice to speak in the manner that he does ... protected by a computer screen so that he doesn't straight up get his face smashed in ... because that's what would actually happen if anyone was stupid enough to talk like this in public. It's easy to act this way online. It is nauseating and frustrating beyond measure that anyone can be this delusional and hateful, but thanks to the carelessness of MacRumors, it will probably continue on for another 2,000 posts.

While I don't agree with him either, the point of PRSI is that it's supposed to be controversial. It doesn't help anyone to simply censor opinions or arguments that we don't agree with, no matter how silly they may be.